ArticleIndian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine2024
Efficacy and Safety of Continuous vs Intermittent Linezolid Infusion in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock.
Article in Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Continuous Infusion of Linezolid: Explaining the Discrepant Survival Outcomes between Two Studies.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The synthetic antimicrobial agent Linezolid effectively penetrates many tissues and exhibits effectiveness against drug-resistant Gram-positive bacteria. This agent's pharmacokinetic qualities cast doubt on the need for intravenous treatment in cases of serious illness. For its time-dependent action to have an impact, serum levels must stay above the minimum inhibitory concentration throughout the dosage interval. According to our research, Linezolid infusions have been proposed to be given as continuous infusions to maintain adequate tissue and serum levels without trough concentration fluctuations. This will optimize the drug's effects and protect against toxicity and drug resistance. In critically ill individuals experiencing septic shock in the ICU, this study sought to validate the safety and efficacy of continuous Linezolid infusion in comparison to the conventional regimen. A prospective, randomized, controlled research involving 140 individuals suffering from septic shock who were older than 18 was carried out. Two groups of patients were randomly assigned. With an average treatment duration of 9.83 ± 2.537 in the intermittent infusion group and 7.39 ± 1.653 in the continuous infusion group, the first group obtained IV linezolid 600 mg twice daily as an intermittent infusion (II) over 60 minutes, whereas the second group obtained 300 mg IV as a loading dosage, and then continuous infusion of 900 mg/day in the first day and 1,200 mg/day in the subsequent days. There was a significantly high clinical cure and less ICU and hospital stay in the continuous infusion group ( How to cite this article: Albadry AM, Zakaria HY, Elhefny MM, Elsherif IM. Efficacy and Safety of Continuous vs Intermittent Linezolid Infusion in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock. Indian J Crit Care Med 2024;28(12):1118-1121.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.